The Clarkdale Review: Intel's Core i5 661, i3 540 & i3 530
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 4, 2010 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Windows 7 Application Performance
We're testing out a few new additions to our Bench database, so what we've got here are some updated application tests run under Windows 7. The CPUs compared are going to be different since we don't have as much historical data, but we'll be building it up over the coming months.
x264 HD Encoding Performance
It's what you've all been asking for - our x264 encoding test with an updated version of x264. In this case we're using TechARP's x264-HD 3.03 bench and x264 version 1342.
As expected. The dual-core chips just can't compete with the triple and quad-core competitors.
7-zip Benchmark & Performance
We use WinRAR for our compression test under Vista, but more and more users are switching to 7-zip. The performance is more CPU dependent so we're going to look at it. First up is the built in 7-zip benchmark:
With no I/O bottlenecks the benchmark scales very well with CPU speed and core count. As a result, our faithful Clarkdales don't look all that great. In the real world though, Clarkdale performance (at least from the i3s) is respectable.
Here we're taking the same 300MB set of images from our WinRAR test and are compressing them using 7-zip. We divide file size by completion time to get compression speed in KB/s:
Sonar 8 Multi-track Audio Export
We've had some requests for digital audio workstation benchmarks so we're adding a multi-track audio export from Sonar 8. Performance is expressed in KB/s:
This is one of those situations where the i5 661 performs well for its price, but the real stars are the i3 540/530 again. They perform like CPUs much more expensive than they are.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
93 Comments
View All Comments
Jamahl - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
If this is a sign of things to come from intels 32nm, AMD must be laughing their asses off.Every one of these cpu's is an overpriced piece of garbage.
ereavis - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
Phenom II X2 550 should be on this list, it's the direct competitor to the i3 -- dual core with real cache. It beats the Athlon II X4 processors and the Athlon II X2 don't even belong.ereavis - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
blasted no edit function. The 550 is also about the same price point.Guess I didn't combine criticism with the fact that this review was exactly what I've been waiting for and very well written, I like the added IGP page as I'm sitting on a 785 IGP while discrete cards are in between releases. All of which may get passed on to my mom's dying Sempron if an I3 deal pops up.
Also minor correction, the Phenom II 925 is an X4. Where are the release dates?
SilentSin - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
I second your question to Intel about the pricing of the 32nm i5 chips...who the hell is going to buy that? The i3's are looking pretty sweet as an alternative to an AMD HTPC platform at that low price point, though. March should make for an interesting competition once AMD launches their new RD890G (4350 based) chipsets. I'm guessing those will thoroughly trounce the GMA part on these chips as well as having quite a few features that the Intel HD stuff can't do, but at least Intel put something up that isn't completely laughable for once.Cogman - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
x264 is NOT a codec. Let me repeat that, x264 is NOT a codec. It is an ENCODER. The video output from x264 is in the H.264 standard (or codec if you like).Saying that x264 is an alternative to H.264 is retarded. It isn't an alternative, it USES the H.264 standard. Its like trying to say that mySQL is an alternative to the Ansi SQL standard. It isn't an alternative, it is an implementation of it.
puffpio - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
hahaha..that always gets on my nerves too!but you can take it as a compliment that x264's popularity is strong enough that people mistake it for h264..
people make the same mistake with divx, kleenex, qtip, xerox, etc...
Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
My apologies for sounding like a fool :-) I've updated the text. I just meant that it was an alternative to closed source H.264 encoders but my phrasing was absolutely horrendous for that purpose.Thanks for pointing out the error :)
Take care,
Anand
proneax - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
I would like to see you measure the power consumption on the DH55TC using the integrated graphics.Legitreviews shows Idle/Load of 49/99W for the 661 in that setup.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
Agreed - I'll do it as soon as I'm back in the office. Just gotta survive CES :)Take care,
Anand
medi01 - Monday, January 4, 2010 - link
Dual core 3.3Ghz CPU + Radeon 5870 consuming only 110 watt at load???